reclaiming the secular: developing dialogic skills for a ... · reclaiming the secular: developing...
TRANSCRIPT
Reclaiming the Secular: Developing Dialogic Skills for
a Post-Secular Society
Antony Luby1a
Abstract
This research paper addresses secularization from both
political and religious perspectives. One of its manifestations
in the political sphere is that of globalization that can lead to
alienation within society; and in the United Kingdom this is
exemplified by Brexit. Within the religious sphere
secularization is usually couched in oppositional terms. This
paper reclaims the original use of the word secular as
envisaged in a three realms’ model of society comprising
profane, sacred and secular realms. The secular realm acts as
a buffer between the profane and sacred realms and in this
neutral, public sphere the power of reason prevails. An
educational starting point for such creation is pedagogy and
through linguistic, psychological and cultural analysis, this
paper identifies the development of reasoning through the
dialogic skills of building consensus (cumulative talk) and
constructive criticism (exploratory talk). Sixty-five students
from a varied background of UK secondary schools have
participated in the development of these dialogic skills.
© 2019 IJSCL. All rights reserved.
1 PhD, Email: [email protected]
Tel: +44-13-30822734 a University of Glasgow, UK
ARTICLE HISTORY:
Received December 2018
Received in revised form February 2019
Accepted February 2019
Available online March 2019
KEYWORDS:
Secular
Cumulative
Exploratory
Dialogue
Talk
28 Reclaiming the Secular: Developing Dialogic Skills for a Post-Secular Society
… I consider essential for facing the
present moment: constructive dialogue
…When leaders in various fields ask me
for advice, my response is always the
same: dialogue, dialogue, dialogue. (Pope
Francis, 2013)
1. Introduction
hese are turbulent times of division
within Europe. The land of my birth,
Scotland, faces imminent wrenching
from the European Union; and this, at the hands
of our neighbors. The Church of my faith,
Roman Catholic, is being led by a Pope,
Francis, whose papacy furthers division with
almost every utterance (e.g., Cunningham,
2018). A root cause of these maladies is
secularization. Within European society it takes
the form of globalization; and within the United
Kingdom (UK) this leads to an alienation that
gives birth to a rise of the ‘Little Englander’
mentality and Brexit. Within the Catholic faith,
secularization spawns the heresy of modernism.
What can be done? A solution is proffered
above by the ‘modernist’ Pope Francis namely,
‘dialogue, dialogue, dialogue’. Heeding this
ecclesiastical advice, this paper contends that
the development of dialogic skills within the
classroom can be a seedbed for the creation of
a post-secular society that heals divisions.
2. Secularization
The claim that we live in a secular age is made
in the opening words of Charles Taylor’s
magnum opus, A Secular Age; and for this
assertion he has a wealth of scholarly support
(e.g., Calhoun, Juergensmeyer, & VanAntwerpen,
2011; Mendieta & van Antwerpen, 2011;
Parker & Reader, 2016; Schuller, 2006;
Williams, 2012). Indeed, such as Stoeckl (2015,
p. 1) confidently asserts that “European
societies are secularized societies” whilst in a
discussion of American society, Moreland
(2012) holds that,
… most people have little or no
understanding of a Christian way of
seeing the world, nor is a Christian
worldview an important participant in the
way we as a society frame and debate
issues in the public square. Three of the
major centers of influence in our culture
– the university, the media, and the
government – are largely devoid of
serious religious discussion. (p. 27)
In order to re-create the prevailing Western
societies from secular to post-secular in which
the public sphere is marked by ‘serious
religious discussion’, it is helpful to visit the
concept of a ‘Three realms’ model of society’
as envisaged by Robert Markus.
3. Three Realms’ Model
According to Markus (2006, pp. 5-6) there
arose in early Christianity an understanding that
society comprises three realms namely the
sacred, the profane, and the secular; and these
he defines as follows:
a) Sacred – “… will be roughly coextensive
with the sphere of Christian religious
belief, practices, institutions and cult” e.g.,
participating in mass, attending Bible
studies class, etc.
b) Profane – “… will be close to what has to
be rejected in the surrounding culture,
practices, institutions…” e.g., abortion,
pornography, etc.
c) Secular – “… does not have such
connotations of radical opposition to the
sacred; it is more neutral, capable of being
accepted or adapted ...” e.g., attending
school, discussion in a pub, etc.
The boundaries between these realms are held
to be flexible but, notably, the secular realm has
a crucial function to “… resist any hostile
takeover of this middle ground between sacred
and profane …” (Markus, 2006, p. 37).
Arguably, Western societies have struggled to
maintain this neutrality of the secular realm.
Post-Constantine and through the era of
Christendom the sacred realm prospered and
the profane realm declined. This Christian
‘victory’ was achieved at the expense of the
secular realm failing with regard to its function
of preserving neutrality; since it had become so
suffused with Christian values that, in Europe,
it was virtually impossible not to profess belief
in God.
Post-Enlightenment however, the situation
reversed as the secular realm became a public
space “… emptied of God or of any reference
to ultimate reality” (Taylor, 2007, p. 2). Again,
Western societies failed to uphold the role of
T
29 A. Luby/ International Journal of Society, Culture & Language, 7(1), 2019 ISSN 2329-2210
the secular realm with respect to neutrality as it
has become overwhelmed with some liberal
values. This steady and growing removal of
religion’s influence upon the public sphere, and
the consequent loss of neutrality within the
secular realm, provoked a lament from Pope
Emeritus Benedict XVI that “Secularism is no
longer that element of neutrality, which opens
up space for freedom for all” (Johnston & Petre,
2004). The losses of influence have also
instigated widespread debate within Christian
circles as how best to react and, broadly
speaking, within the largest Christian tradition
of the Catholic Church there has arisen two
differing movements in response to aggressive
secularism: namely, Augustinian Thomism and
Whig Thomism. As Rowland (2005) explains,
There are thus two different readings of
modernity and with that, two different
readings of how the Church should
engage the contemporary world. While
the Whigs want the Church to
accommodate the culture of modernity,
the Augustinians favor a much more
critical stance.
4. Two Thomisms
Augustinian Thomism decries the collapse of
the neutrality of the secular realm and asserts
that the Catholic Church must work to
overthrow the liberal values which pervade the
secular realm. The perception of Augustinian
Thomists such as George Weigel (2013) is that
the Catholic Church should be on a war footing
since the environment has become toxic. In
response to this toxicity, Weigel (2013)
proposes a form of evangelical Catholicism “...
that will equip the Church for its evangelical
responsibilities in a time of great challenge”.
Church communities will be radically renewed
as they prepare themselves to re-propose
Catholicism to the world (Mallon, 2014).
Nonetheless, this approach commits the
Catholic Church to separating from the secular
realm and so, temporarily at least, the three
realms’ model would not be fully functioning;
since a barrier would be erected between the
sacred and secular realms. Moreover, the
Augustinian Thomist desire to retreat from the
secular realm for the purpose of renewal may
not fully take into account the ingrained
secularism prevalent within the West. Indeed,
as Casanova (2011, p. 67) contends: “… people
are not simply religiously ‘unmusical’ but are
actually closed to any form of transcendence
beyond the purely secular immanent frame”.
Given this lack of ‘musicality’ and closure to
the transcendent, then the prospects for a
successful re-evangelization of the West
appears to be slim.
A different approach, but with a similarly
unsatisfactory outcome, is proposed by Whig
Thomism. Like their Augustinian counterparts,
the Whig Thomists accept that the neutrality of
the secular realm has been overcome by liberal
values. However, rather than retreating from
the secular realm, the Whig Thomists seek to
work with the prevailing liberal values and to
Christianize them. For example, a chief
proponent of this view Novak (1991) makes the
point that free markets depend upon liberal,
democratic values that are generated from
Christian sources. Indeed, as Stark (2005, p. 76)
contends “… Western democracy owe(s) its
essential intellectual origins and legitimacy to
Christian ideals, not to any Greco-Roman
legacy. It all began with the New Testament”.
However, according to Rowland (2003, p. 159),
this admixture of values has resulted in a
process of ‘heretical reconstruction’ or ‘secular
parody’, whereby “… a divine directive to ‘love
your neighbor’ has been transmuted into
‘tolerance’”. Seeking the good of others seems
incomprehensible to people who have been
acculturated through liberal values to allow
others to do as they wish. So, granting
acculturation through liberal values that are a
secular parody of Christian values, the
prospects for a successful transformation of the
secular realm also appear to be slim.
5. Creating a Post-Secular Society
Since it would appear that neither Whig
transformation nor Augustinian retreat from the
secular realm are likely to succeed – is it not
timely for the Catholic Church to rethink her
approach to the secular realm? For the Church
has continually rethought her strategies for
evangelization when confronted with “…
transformations of culture — the fall of the
Roman Empire, the Enlightenment,
industrialization, democratization, globalization
…” (Glendon, 2001). Perhaps now, argues
Glendon (2001), “what may be required … is
nothing less than a large–scale reappraisal and
30 Reclaiming the Secular: Developing Dialogic Skills for a Post-Secular Society
renewal of the educational apostolate of the
Church”. What might be at the heart of such a
renewed educational apostolate? Should the
Catholic Church not view the secular realm as
a neglected friend? In the same fashion that one
would wish such a friend restored to former
good standing; should not the Church wish the
secular realm to be restored to a state of
‘neutrality which opens up space for freedom
for all’? After all, this was the original
understanding of the role of the secular realm.
6. Liberal Alliance
In expending her energies to fortify and restore
the secular realm, the Church would not be
without support, since some influential liberal
thinkers’ express similar desires. As understood
in the classic liberal tradition, the liberal secular
realm is pluralist, tolerant, and neutral with
regard to religion. However, there has since
arisen another form of liberalism that promotes
the flourishing of secular humanist objectives
(Appleby, 2011); and this more ‘virulent’
liberalism has promoted a process of
secularization determined to squeeze religion
out of the public sphere and to privatize entirely
religious belief (Willimon, 2017).
Somewhat surprisingly, this belittling of the
role of religion in the public sphere has attracted
criticism from no less a figure than Jurgen
Habermas, regarded as “… the personification
of liberal, individual, and secular thinking”
(Schuller, 2006). In a revision of his earlier
thinking and writings, Habermas (2006) now
argues for a post-secular society in which he
envisions that:
The neutrality of the state authority on
questions of world views guarantees the
same ethical freedom to every citizen …
When secularized citizens act in their role
as citizens of the state, they must not deny
in principle that religious images of the
world have the potential to express truth.
Nor must they refuse their believing
fellow citizens the right to make
contributions in a religious language to
public debates. (p. 15)
Habermas’ vision is of a post-secular society in
which religion returns to a renewed public
sphere in which religious imagery and language
are freely used. Other eminent liberal theorists
have also revised their views of religion in the
public sphere e.g., John Rawls who accepts in a
late work “… that religiously motivated
arguments should be accepted as publicly valid
…” (Calhoun, 2011, p. 78). To re-create the
secular realm such that we have a post-secular
society - is this not a legitimate aim for
evangelization - a worthy educational apostolate?
Such a vision appears to be supported by Pope
Emeritus Benedict XVI, who comments “what,
then, ought we to do? … I am in broad
agreement with Jurgen Habermas’ remarks
about a post-secular society, about the
willingness to learn from each other, and about
self-limitation on both sides” (Ratzinger, 2006,
p. 77).
From a Christian perspective, this vision of a
post-secular society is a clear improvement
upon the situation today. That religion should
have a valid role in the public sphere and that
religious imagery and language might be freely
expressed and regarded as potentially true: such
developments are to be welcomed. Moreover,
there is a realistic prospect of success; rather
than ‘tilting at windmills’ Don Quixote style to
re-evangelize the secular realm; and instead of
a Herculean cleansing of the Augean Stables to
transform the secular into the sacred: there is
offered here a clear-headed alliance between
the Catholic Church and classic liberal thinkers
to create a genuinely post-secular society.
But for such an alliance, there is a price to be
paid: self-limitation. The Catholic Church will
need to recognize that a post-secular society
will not be a form of Constantinian or
mediaeval Christendom; rather it will be a
pluralist Christendom “… within whose walls
unbelievers live together and share in the same
temporal good” (Maritain, 1938, p. 166). In
such a just society both liberals and Christians
will “… take seriously each other’s
contributions to controversial subjects in the
public debate” (Habermas, 2006, p. 47). At
present, the Church’s views may be afforded
serious recognition with regard to private
matters of personal morality such as abortion,
divorce, same-sex relationships, etc. However,
in the public sphere discussions concerning
technological and medical advances are
dominated by economic, political, sociological,
and especially scientific voices (Smith, 2008).
For a theological voice to be taken seriously in
31 A. Luby/ International Journal of Society, Culture & Language, 7(1), 2019 ISSN 2329-2210
the public sphere, then self-limitation seems a
price worth paying.
7. Principle of Self-Limitation
If the secular realm in three realms’ model of a
post-secular society is one in which the public
sphere of debate is marked by self-limitation,
then the liberal traditions will need to accept the
principle of self-limitation in two areas. They
will need to disavow advocacy of secularist
ideologies that contend religion should be
banished from the public sphere; and also
secularization ideologies in which religion is
held to be a purely private matter. Hence, for
those from the classic liberal traditions the
principle of self-limitation imposes the
restriction of accepting political liberalism and
discarding comprehensive liberalism. As
advocated by John Locke, political liberalism
envisioned a society in which persons from
diverse traditions altered their ways of thinking
and acting in response to conversations with
others: this took place in an environment
supported by the values of freedom and
tolerance. However, these values gradually
became reified as ends in themselves and, as a
result, political liberalism was superseded by a
comprehensive liberalism that aims to
maximize autonomy and tolerance (Wright,
2013). And so, comprehensive liberalism then
paved the way for various secularisms and for
secularization. In order, therefore, to
successfully create a post-secular society, it is
necessary that those from the classic liberal
tradition return to political liberalism and cease
pursuit of comprehensive liberalism.
For her part, the Catholic Church will require to
impose upon herself the self-limitation of not
making “… a direct appeal to the absolute, a
transcendent notion of ultimate truth, [as this] is
a step outside the bounds of reasoned public
discourse” (Calhoun et al., 2011, p. 19). With
respect to the creation of a post-secular society,
the admission price for the Catholic Church to
influence public life is the imposition of a vow
of silence regarding transcendent, revealed
knowledge; and a focus on human reasoning.
The Catholic Church should be comfortable
with this principle of self-limitation since, as
the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC,
39) makes clear,
In defending the ability of human reason
to know God, the Church is expressing
her confidence in the possibility of
speaking about him to all men and with
all men, and therefore of dialogue with
other religions, with philosophy and
science, as well as with unbelievers and
atheists.
Limiting debate within public sphere to the use
of human reason – and so excluding
supernatural faith – is an appropriate
educational apostolate for the Church. As Saint
Thomas Aquinas affirms, “both the light of
reason and the light of faith come from God…
hence there can be no contradiction between
them” (Pope Saint John Paul II., 1998). And so,
from a Catholic perspective, this proposal for
creating a post-secular society founded on the
use of human reason can be described as
Thomist. Fittingly, given Aquinas’ background,
it can also be portrayed as Dominican: how so?
8. A Dominican Thomist Approach
As an alternative to the Augustinian Thomist
and Whig Thomist approaches that seek to
retreat from or transform the secular realm, a
third Dominican Thomist approach is proposed.
This approach seeks a three realms’ model of
society whereby the Catholic Church, in
alliance with the classic liberal tradition, aims
to strengthen the neutrality of the secular realm
and, in so doing, create a genuinely post-secular
society. Such an approach can be termed
Thomist in that this alliance is founded on a
shared avowal of the powers of human
reasoning. It can also bear the appellation
‘Dominican’ for two reasons. Firstly, this three
realms’ model of society is predicated upon the
times of the Early Church and, as such, it
resembles the theological movement of
ressourcement, which was in essence a return
to tradition i.e., “[t]he primary exponents of
ressourcement … were a small group of French
Dominicans of the faculty of Le Saulchoir in
Paris…” established in the late 1930s (Kaslyn,
2013, p. 307). Secondly, in his discussion of the
Dominican Order, Drane (1988, p. 71)
comments that it “has constantly been true to its
vocation as the organ of popularizing truth. It
has borrowed from the spirit of the age to
supply the wants of the age”.
32 Reclaiming the Secular: Developing Dialogic Skills for a Post-Secular Society
What are the wants of this secular age? And
what is its spirit?
Perhaps it is Taylor (2007, p. 9) who comes
closest to capturing the wants and spirit of the
secular age when he speaks of “… the power of
cool, disengaged reason, capable of
contemplating the world and human life
without illusion, and of acting lucidly for the
best in the interest of human flourishing”. The
wants of this age, as of every age, concern
human flourishing. But in the secular age the
answers are found neither in philosophical
theories, nor moral codes, nor religious
devotions: the answer is to be found in human
reasoning. In this secular age it is not the
supernatural which inspires awe: it is reason.
And so a Dominican Thomist response to this
want for human flourishing in a secular age
would be to borrow from the spirit of the age:
human reason.
This accord over human reason – this
Dominican Thomist alliance between the
Catholic and classic liberal traditions – comes
at a propitious time as liberal thinkers have
gone into overdrive as they reconsider
secularity within the context of globalization
(e.g., Bhargava, 2011; Calhoun et al., 2011;
Stepan, 2011). Given this ferment of activity
and the resultant reconceptualization of
secularity on the part of liberal thinkers, and
given Pope Francis’ welcoming approach to
atheists (Brown, 2013), this seems a good time
for the Catholic Church to build an alliance with
liberalism in the creation of a post-secular
society. But where to begin?
9. Pedagogy
An appropriate educational starting point is
pedagogy, which is a relationship between
classroom practices and wider society that is
recognized as performing a “… crucial role in
the process of social reproduction i.e. the
process whereby a society reproduces itself
over time and so maintains its identity across
the generations...” (Carr, 1993, p. 6). However,
pedagogies need not only be concerned with
social reproduction and preservation of
society’s status quo, since, “… (as) mainsprings
of schooling. They can serve … as levers of
social production. They can be in the vanguard
of social change …” (Hamilton, 1990, p. 55)
Pedagogy as social production is required for
the creation of a post-secular society. However,
working in partnership with classic liberalism
to achieve this social change requires a high
degree of sensitivity from the Catholic Church,
since “… education is commonly prized as both
the heir and the custodian of liberal principles”
(Conroy & Davis, 2008, p. 188). The Church
should tread softly.
Whilst treading carefully with respect to
pedagogy, the Church should note the advice of
Gearon (2013, p. 104) that there is a
fundamental or ‘incommensurable’ difference
between pedagogies “… related to the religious
life … [and those] … more closely related to
secularity”. That is to say, for pedagogy as
social production, rather than confessional
pedagogy, it may be advisable to fashion
pedagogy that “… arise(s) from bringing
religion and education into a relationship within
the context of a secular education system
serving the needs and interests of … a diversely
plural society” (Grimmitt, 2000, p. 15). The
UK’s world of religious education (RE) is rich
with pedagogies that have arisen in response to
the issues and difficulties posed by secularity
and pluralism (e.g., Blaylock, 2004; Gearon,
2013; Grimmitt, 2000): but which pedagogy
fulfils Habermas’ (2006) vision of a post-
secular society?
Habermas (2006) envisages a post-secular
society in which religious language and images
have the potential to express truth. Not only do
such language and images have a legitimate
place within public debates, Habermas (2006,
pp. 51-52) also has an expectation that “… the
secularized citizens play their part in the
endeavors to translate relevant contributions
from the religious language into a language that
is accessible to the public as a whole”. This
clearly entails dialogue between those with
faith and those without faith; and a genuine
commitment to understand each other. Indeed,
it implies that each side must collaborate to
produce a common language. Which RE
pedagogies are best suited to this task?
First, it calls to mind critical realism, an
approach which regards itself as a “… theology
concerned with questions of ultimate truth …”
(Wright, 2000, p. 172). This critical pedagogy
creates intelligent conversations between the
horizon of the students and the horizons of
33 A. Luby/ International Journal of Society, Culture & Language, 7(1), 2019 ISSN 2329-2210
religion; and these conversations are concerned
with questions of ultimate truth. Second, it
resonates with the proposal of Castelli (2012)
for an RE faith dialogue pedagogy that
develops students’ skills in articulating their
own beliefs whilst responding to others’ belief
systems. Specifically, Dominican Thomist
pedagogy should therefore be characterized by
students conversing intelligently about ultimate
truth claims through analysis of arguments and
evidence. In so doing, they might develop their
own belief systems in response to the beliefs of
others. Notably, a Dominican Thomist
pedagogy commits Catholic educators to an
unusually open and dialogic approach to RE
classroom practices. A fundamental question
then arises: ‘how commensurate is this critical,
dialogic pedagogy with the teachings of the
Catholic Church?’.
10. The Catholic Church and Dialogue
In the modern world, the Catholic Church is
confident about dialogue with those of other
faiths and of no faith (de Lubac, 1995); and
actively encourages it. As Pope Francis (2013,
p. 34) tells us in his first encyclical letter, “…
the security of faith sets us on a journey; it
enables witness and dialogue with all”. And his
predecessor Pope Saint John Paul II (1990) set
down the marker for such a journey in dialogue
with his encyclical letter Redemptoris Missio,
Dialogue does not originate from tactical
concerns or self-interest, but is an activity
with its own guiding principles,
requirements and dignity … Those
engaged in this dialogue must be
consistent with their own religious
traditions and convictions, and be open to
understanding those of the other party
without pretense or close-mindedness,
but with truth, humility and frankness,
knowing that dialogue can enrich each
side. There must be no abandonment of
principles nor false irenicism, but instead
a witness given and received for mutual
advancement. (p. 56)
This is a robust understanding of dialogue in
which there is no suing for a false peace. Parties
to dialogue, Catholic and non-Catholic, are
instructed to remain true to their beliefs and to
engage frankly with each other. At the heart of
such dialogue is a common pursuit of truth. As
the Church’s Declaration on Religious Freedom
(Dignitatis Humanae) makes clear,
Truth … is to be sought in a manner
proper to the dignity of the human person
and his social nature. The inquiry is to be
free, carried on with the aid of teaching or
instruction, communication and dialogue,
in the course of which people explain to
one another the truth they have discovered,
or think they have discovered, in order
thus to assist one another in the quest for
truth … (Pope Saint Paul VI, 1965, p. 3)
A strongly dialogic approach to discovering
truth is particularly well reflected within the
Church’s teaching concerning education.
Crucially, there is here a moral imperative to
take into account the needs of all students, as
emphasized by the Congregation for Catholic
Education (CCE) (1982, Para.14) with its
assertion that, “Catholic educators ... must have
the greatest respect for those students who are
not Catholic. They should be open at all times
to authentic dialogue…”.
This openness to ‘authentic dialogue’ indicates
that the educational context cannot be one that
operates on ‘tactical concerns or self-interest’
as alluded by Pope Saint John Paul II above. If
the purpose of the dialogue is simply to convert
non-Catholics, then it would be inauthentic or
‘a form of manipulation’ (Baum, 2000). To be
truly authentic the Catholic students have to
engage in
… respectful dialogue [emphasis added]
with those who do not yet accept the
Gospel. Believers can profit from this
dialogue by learning to appreciate better
‘those elements of truth and grace which
are found among peoples, and which are,
as it were, a secret presence of God’.
(CCC, 856)
Through participation in authentic and
respectful dialogue, Catholic students can
benefit from discovering ‘elements of truth and
grace’ within their peers. Given that the Church
encourages and upholds authentic, respectful
dialogue in pursuit of the truth, and in the hope
that she accepts the self-limitation of human
reasoning, how might such a Dominican
Thomist pedagogy manifest itself in the
classroom?
34 Reclaiming the Secular: Developing Dialogic Skills for a Post-Secular Society
11. Reasoning - Cumulative Talk and
Exploratory Talk
The heart of Dominican Thomist pedagogy is to
be found in reasoning and dialogue. In the
classroom, reasoning can be developed through
the acquisition and honing of the dialogic skills
of cumulative talk and exploratory talk
(Mercer, 1995). Reasoning is made visible as
students try to create trust and achieve
consensus through cumulative talk in which
they “… build positively but uncritically on
what the other has said” (p. 104). This is a pre-
requisite to exploratory talk in which the
students “… engage critically but constructively
with each other’s ideas”. (Mercer, 1995, p. 104)
The development of such reasoning, through
the dialogic skills of cumulative talk and
exploratory talk, was undertaken by twenty
students at a Scottish city-center secondary
school as part of a small-scale action research
study (Luby, 2014). It is noteworthy that,
despite the small sample size, the findings are
statistically significant; providing some
evidence that a beginning had been made that is
indicative of possibility of Dominican Thomist
pedagogy. A more recent study (Luby, 2019)
involved sixty-five students from ten secondary
schools across the UK sited primarily in the
East Midlands and South Yorkshire regions.
The ten secondary schools from this
opportunity sample represent the three most
common types of schools – academies,
comprehensives, and faith schools. There is a
spread of locations for the schools across four
types of city, town, semi-rural, and rural but the
sample does skew towards the lower end of the
spectrum with regard to attainment levels. The
opportunity sample also skews towards schools
that have catchment areas containing
neighborhoods of deprivation. Overall, though,
there is a broad representation of school types,
attainment levels and locations such as to afford
a fair degree of robustness to the research
findings.
The sixty-five students took part in paired
conversations that were recorded and
transcribed for analysis with regard to the
dialogic skills of consensus building through
cumulative talk; and constructive criticism
through exploratory talk. A leading project with
respect to developing such dialogic skills for
students is Thinking Together based at the
Faculty of Education, Cambridge University;
and the project’s foundational book is Mercer’s
The Guided Construction of Knowledge: Talk
Amongst Teachers and Learners. In this work
Mercer (1995, p. 104) indicates that students’
dialogic skill of cumulative talk whereby they
“… build positively but uncritically on what the
other has said” is “… characterized by
repetitions, confirmations and elaborations”
(see Extract 1 below).
Extract 1
Cumulative talk – linguistic analysis
Robbie: Definitely! Do you … would you
agree with me that … I don’t feel like … I
do believe in evolution as well as God like
creating animals but I do believe they also
evolved into what we have today. Would
you agree with that?
Jamie: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Totally agree!
That’s pretty sound.
Robbie: Cool! Pretty sound indeed. Um
… yeah … I also think stuff that’s read in
the Bible is not fully meant to be taken
entirely literally like the story of Adam
and Eve and stuff.
Jamie: Yeah I think some people take that
too literally and people are up in arms
about evolution and Adam and Eve and
how it’s all wrong but I think it’s more
symbolic than it is literal.
Robbie: Definitely! Yeah that’s what it is …
In this example from Luby (2014, p. 63),
cumulative talk is demonstrated by Jamie
confirming Robbie’s belief in God-guided
evolution. Also, there is both repetition and
confirmation with regard to a literal
understanding of the Adam and Eve story.
Indeed, some elaboration is offered by Jamie
with the introduction of symbolism; and this is
confirmed by Robbie. This sharing of ideas and
information and joint decision-making helps to
establish trust; and “trust is an essential
component … particularly when students are
challenging their own and others’ world-
views” (Pierce & Gilles, 2008, p. 43). So, the
development of trust within cumulative talk
appears to be a necessary pre-requisite for
exploratory talk in which the students “…
35 A. Luby/ International Journal of Society, Culture & Language, 7(1), 2019 ISSN 2329-2210
engage critically but constructively with each
other’s ideas” (Mercer, 1995, p. 104).
Exploratory talk, though, is more than just a
robust form of dialogue at the linguistic level:
it gets to the very heart of Dominican Thomist
post-secular pedagogy that is characterized by
intelligent conversations about ultimate truth
claims. And, as Mercer (1995) suggests, this
can be demonstrated through three levels of
analysis – linguistic, psychological and
cultural.
12. Linguistic Analytical Level
At a linguistic level, exploratory talk satisfies
the demand for robust student conversations
that will promote ‘speech acts’ such as
assertions, challenges, explanations, requests,
etc. At this level, exploratory talk is typified by
“statements and suggestions [being] offered for
joint consideration [and] these may be challenged
and counter-challenged, but challenges are
justified and alternative hypotheses are offered”
(Mercer, 1995, p. 104) (see Extract 2 below).
Extract 2
Exploratory talk – linguistic analysis
Douglas: Well I might disagree with you
there because I think that um … humans
are the cause of sin because God gave us
freewill, he didn’t want to control us
otherwise we’d be like robots.
Craig: Uh huh.
Douglas: And that wouldn’t give us any
freedom at all, we’ll always be good and
God gave us freewill to choose what is
right but obviously humans didn’t
choose that way, they didn’t the right
way and they’ve become selfish, like
Eve tricking Adam into eating that apple
which caused him to sin against God,
and that obviously angered God and I
think for me I think that’s because of sin,
humans are the cause of sin.
Craig: Yeah, I’d agree that humans are
the cause of sin and no doubt our sort of
freewill, if we have it. We often choose
the wrong path and, again the Adam and
Eve story is a fantastic way of
illustrating society, and how people sin
and what effect it can have. But, again, I
think these stories need to be taken with
a pinch of salt; and that they are in my
opinion nothing more than stories. But
you can still read into them as much as
you can read into many sorts of novels
and literature; which of course we know
they aren’t true stories. But we can still
appreciate the moral values that they
give us such as to name a few, The Lord
of the Flies and Animal Farm, that many
of us studied in English um … that’s my
point of view with regards to that.
Douglas: Well I think the stories could
be pretty accurate because they’ve been
passed on with the Bible and the
Catholic Church; they’ve been passed on
ever since Jesus came into this world as
a form of God and even before that in the
Old Testament (Reprinted from Luby,
2014, pp. 63-64).
In this example, exploratory talk is evidenced
by Douglas, who offers a view on the
relationship between humanity, freewill and
sin. This view is challenged by Craig who
justifies his criticism by countering that
Douglas holds a too literal understanding of the
Creation story. Instead, Craig moots an
alternative hypothesis in which the Creation
story is regarded more like a novel that contains
important moral truths. In response, Douglas
counter-challenges this view with an appeal to
the authority of the Bible and Tradition.
13. Psychological Analytical Level
This paper has discussed the spirit of this
secular age and, in particular, identified from
Charles Taylor’s magnum opus that this spirit is
‘the power of cool, disengaged reason’. It is an
accord about human reason that would enable a
Dominican Thomist alliance between the
Catholic and classic liberal traditions to fortify
the secular realm in the creation of a post-
secular society. Tellingly, exploratory talk is
central to human reasoning as affirmed by
Mercer (1995),
Exploratory talk foregrounds reasoning
[emphasis added]. Its ground rules
require that the views of all participants
are sought and considered, that proposals
are explicitly stated and evaluated, and
36 Reclaiming the Secular: Developing Dialogic Skills for a Post-Secular Society
that explicit agreement precedes decisions
and actions. Both cumulative and
exploratory talk seem to be aimed at the
achievement of consensus … In cumulative
talk … ideas and information are
certainly shared and joint decisions may
be reached … Exploratory talk, by
incorporating both conflict and the open
sharing of ideas represents the more
‘visible’ pursuit of rational consensus
through conversation. (p. 105)
We witness the beginnings of such formation in
human reasoning in the above conversation
between Douglas and Craig through their
exemplification of the attributes of ‘conflict’
and ‘the open sharing of ideas’. Moreover, their
‘visible pursuit of rational consensus’ is based
on ‘ground rules’ that not only derive implicitly
from their friendship; but also explicitly from a
prompt sheet that each reads prior to their
conversation (Luby, 2012, p. 40). Recognition
that these ground rules have influenced Douglas
and Craig’s conversation is evidenced by:
(a) Douglas clearly stating his disagreement at
the outset and telling Craig that he wishes
him to think about humans being the cause
of sin; and
(b) Craig initially indicating his agreement
with Douglas’s idea but then explaining
why he thinks differently about the
Creation story.
At the heart of these paired conversations is the
creation of a ‘safe space’ as commended by the
Commission on Religious Education (CORE)
(2017),
The phrase ‘a safe space to discuss
difference’, ... was the most often quoted
single phrase across the evidence
gathering sessions … This is not ‘safe’ in
the sense of ‘sanitized’ but rather a space
where people can talk – agree and
disagree – freely about the contentious
issues raised by worldviews. (p. 26)
This ‘safe space’ within the classroom is
analogous to the secular realm within a post-
secular society: both act as a neutral zone for
the discussion of worldviews. Given then, that
for pedagogy, the classroom is a microcosm of
society; it is timely to consider the third,
cultural level of analysis.
14. Cultural Analytical Level
Drawing upon a threefold model of society
comprising profane, sacred and secular realms,
the argument being outlined within this paper is
that the Catholic Church and other Christians
should ally with those from the classic liberal
tradition in order to strengthen the secular
realm. In the past this realm has proved weak
and porous such that it has been overwhelmed
by values emanating from the sacred realm in
the pre-Enlightenment era; and by values
emanating from the profane realm in the post-
Enlightenment era. It is in the interest of both
parties, Catholic and liberal, to create a post-
secular society with a fortified secular realm
that will enable all people from different faith
and non-faith backgrounds to contribute
confidently to the public sphere. In order to do
so each party will be required to impose upon
itself the principle of self-limitation. With such
an agreement in place, then both parties can
seek to create a post-secular society that bears
the hallmark of a public sphere dignified by
debate that is founded on human reasoning.
Dignified debate founded upon human
reasoning is not an everyday occurrence within
the public sphere: a cursory examination of the
media attests to this. Such exemplary behavior
needs to be learned; and the beginnings of such
behavior can be learned in the classroom; and
the evidence from Luby (2019) clearly supports
this claim (e.g., no less than fifty-two of the
sixty-two paired conversations are rated high
quality or mid-quality).
15. Concluding Remarks
This paper argues for a model of society
comprising three realms - sacred, secular, and
profane. Within this three realms’ model, the
secular realm has a particularly important role
to perform, namely that of a boundary between
the sacred and profane realms. Said boundaries,
though, are not fixed as they permit an
exchange of ideas and concepts across the three
realms. Historically, the secular realm has not
been fully functioning and an argument is
constructed for liberals and Christians to form
an alliance through adopting the principle of
self-limitation as mooted by Jurgen Habermas
and Pope Emeritus Benedict. Such an alliance
can strengthen the secular realm in the creation
of a post-secular society that is pluralist and
tolerant and enables its citizens to contribute to
37 A. Luby/ International Journal of Society, Culture & Language, 7(1), 2019 ISSN 2329-2210
the public sphere. In order that citizens might
create such a society, from a pedagogical
perspective, they require to develop their
human reasoning through acquisition of the
dialogic skills of cumulative talk and
exploratory talk. Some recent research findings
regarding these two types of talk have been
analyzed at linguistic, psychological, and
cultural levels, and these findings offer
promise.
References
Appleby, R. S. (2011). Rethinking
fundamentalism in a secular age. In C.
Calhoun, M. Juergensmeyer, & J.
VanAntwerpen (Eds.), Rethinking
secularism (pp. 225-247). Oxford, UK:
Oxford University Press.
Baum, G. (2000). The theology of cardinal
Ratzinger: A response to Dominus Iesus.
The Ecumenist, 37(4). Retrieved from
http://www.culture-et-foi.com/dossiers/
dominus_jesus/gregory_baum.htm
Bhargava, R. (2011). Rehabilitating secularism.
In C. Calhoun, M. Juergensmeyer, & J.
VanAntwerpen (Eds.). Rethinking
secularism (pp. 92-113). Oxford, UK:
Oxford University Press.
Blaylock, L. (2004). Six schools of thought in
RE. REsource: Professional Reflection
on Theory and Practice in Religious
Education, 27(1), 13-16.
Brown, A. (2013, September 12). Pope Francis
invites atheists to the table. Guardian.
Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.
com/commentisfree/andrewbrown/2013/
sep/12/pope-francis-invites-atheists-
richard-dawkins
Calhoun, C. (2011). Secularism, citizenship and
the public sphere. In C. Calhoun, M.
Juergensmeyer, & J. VanAntwerpen
(Eds.), Rethinking secularism (pp. 75-
91). Oxford, UK: Oxford University
Press.
Calhoun, C., Juergensmeyer, M., &
VanAntwerpen, J. (Eds.). (2011).
Rethinking secularism. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Carr, W. (1993). Reconstructing the curriculum
debate: An editorial introduction.
Curriculum Studies, 1(1), 5-9.
Casanova, J. (2011). The secular, secularizations,
secularisms. In C. Calhoun, M.
Juergensmeyer, & J. VanAntwerpen
(Eds.), Rethinking secularism (pp. 54-
91). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Castelli, M. (2012). Faith dialogue as a
pedagogy for a post secular religious
education. Journal of Beliefs & Values:
Studies in Religion and Education, 33(2),
207-216.
Catechism of the Catholic Church. (1994).
London: Geoffrey Chapman.
Commission on Religious Education. (2017).
Religious education for all: Interim
report. Retrieved from http://www.
commissiononre.org.uk/wp-content/
uploads/2017/09/Commission-on-
Religious-Education-Interim-Report-
2017.pdf
Congregation for Catholic Education. (1982).
Lay Catholics in Schools: Witnesses to
Faith. Vatican: Congregation for Catholic
Education.
Conroy, J. C., & Davis, R. A. (2008).
Citizenship, education and the claims of
religious literacy. In M. A. Peters, A.
Britton, & H. Blee (Eds.), Global
citizenship education: Philosophy,
theory and pedagogy (pp. 187-203).
Rotterdam: Sense.
Cunningham, V. (2018, April 16). Will Pope
Francis cause a schism in the Catholic
Church? New Yorker. Retrieved from
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/
2018/04/16/will-pope-francis-cause-a-
schism-in-the-catholic-church
De Lubac, H. (1995). The drama of atheist
humanism (E. M. Riley, A. E. Nash, &
M. Sebanc, Trans.). San Francisco:
Ignatius Press.
Drane, A. T. (1988). The life of Saint Dominic
(6th ed.). Rockford, Illinois: Tan Books.
Gearon, L. (2013). MasterClass in religious
education. Transforming teaching and
learning. London, UK: Bloomsbury.
Glendon, M. A. (2001). Globalization and the
church’s new challenges. Retrieved from
http://www.catholiceducation.org/en/co
ntroversy/politics-and-the-church/
globalization-and-the-church-s-new-
challenges.html
Grimmitt, M. (Ed.). (2000). Pedagogies of
religious education: Case studies in the
research and development of good
pedagogic practice in RE. Great
Wakering, Essex: McCrimmons.
Habermas, J. (2006). Pre-political foundations
of the democratic constitutional state? In
38 Reclaiming the Secular: Developing Dialogic Skills for a Post-Secular Society
F. Schuller (Ed.), The dialectics of
secularization (pp. 19-25). San Francisco:
Ignatius Press.
Hamilton, D. (1990). Learning about
education: An unfinished curriculum.
Buckingham: Open University Press.
Johnston, B., & Petre, J. (2004, November 20).
Secular forces pushing God to margins.
Daily Telegraph Retrieved from
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/world
news/europe/italy/1477075/Secular-
forces-pushing-God-to-margins.html
Kaslyn R. J. (2013). Ressourcement: A
movement for renewal in twentieth
century Catholic theology. In G. Flynn &
P. D. Murray (Eds.), The Jurist: studies
in church law and ministry (pp. 306-
309). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Luby, A. (2012). Developing dialogic skills for
inter faith dialogue (Unpublished
master’s dissertation). Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Luby, A. (2014). First footing inter-faith
dialogue. Educational Action Research,
22(1), 57-71.
Luby, A. (2019). Dominican Thomist pedagogy
for a post-secular society: Developing
dialogic skills in RE for UK secondary
school students (Unpublished doctoral
dissertation). Glasgow, UK: University
of Glasgow.
Mallon, J. (2014). Divine renovation. From a
maintenance to a missional parish.
Toronto, Canada: Novalis.
Maritain, J. (1938). True humanism. New York:
Charles Scribner’s Sons.
Markus, R. A. (2006). Christianity and the
secular. Notre Dame, Indiana:
University of Notre Dame Press.
Mendieta, E., & VanAntwerpen, J. (Eds.).
(2011). The power of religion in the
public sphere. New York: Columbia
University Press.
Mercer, N. (1995). The guided construction of
knowledge: Talk amongst teachers and
learners. Cleveden, Avon: Multilingual
Matters Ltd.
Moreland, J. P. (2012). Love your God with all
your mind: The role of reason in the life
of the soul (2nd ed.). Colorado Springs:
Nav Press.
Novak, M. (1991). The spirit of democratic
capitalism (2nd ed.). Lanham, Maryland:
Madison Books.
Parker, S. G., & Reader, J. (2016). Faith in the
public square. Journal of Belief and
Values, 37(3), 245-246.
Pierce, K. M., & Gilles, C. (2008). From
exploratory talk to critical conversations.
In N. Mercer & S. Hodgkinson (Eds.),
Exploring talk in school (pp. 37-53).
London: Sage.
Pope Francis. (2013). Encyclical letter.
Retrieved from http://www.vatican.va/
holy_father/francesco/encyclicals/docu
ments/papa-francesco_20130629_
enciclica-lumen-fidei_en.html
Pope Saint John Paul II. (1990). Encyclical
letter. Retrieved from http://www.
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/enc
yclicals/documents/hf_jpii_enc_071219
90_redemptoris-missio_en.html
Pope Saint John Paul II. (1998). Encyclical
letter. Retrieved from http://w2.vatican.
va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/
documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_14091998_
fides-et-ratio.html
Pope Saint Paul VI. (1965). Declaration on
religious freedom. Retrieved from
http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_coun
cils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-
ii_decl_19651207_dignitatis-
humanae_en.html
Ratzinger, J. (2006). That which holds the
world together: The pre-political moral
foundations of a free state. In F. Schuller
(Ed.), The dialectics of secularization
(pp. 53-80). San Francisco: Ignatius
Press.
Rowland, T. (2003). Culture and the Thomist
tradition: After Vatican II (1st ed.).
London, UK: Routledge.
Rowland, T. (2005). Benedict XVI, Thomism,
and liberal culture (Part 2). Retrieved
from https://zenit.org/articles/benedict-
xvi-thomism-and-liberal-culture-part-2/
Schuller, F. (Ed.). (2006). The dialectics of
secularization. San Francisco, USA:
Ignatius Press.
Smith, G. (2008). A short history of secularism.
London, UK: I B Tauris.
Stark, R. (2005). The victory of reason. New
York: Random House.
Stepan, A. (2011). The multiple secularisms of
modern democratic and non-democratic
regimes. In C. Calhoun, M. Juergensmeyer,
& J. VanAntwerpen (Eds.). Rethinking
secularism (pp. 114-144). Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
39 A. Luby/ International Journal of Society, Culture & Language, 7(1), 2019 ISSN 2329-2210
Stoeckl, K. (2015). Knowledge about religion
and religious knowledge in secular
societies: Introductory remarks. In K.
Stoeckl & O. Roy (Eds.), The future of
religious education in Europe (pp. 7-18).
Florence: European University Institute.
Taylor, C. (2007). A secular age. Cambridge,
Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Weigel, G. (2013). The rise of evangelical
Catholicism. Retrieved from http://
www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2013/
02/the-rise-of-evangelical-catholicism
Williams, R. (2012). Faith in the public square.
London: Bloomsbury.
Willimon, W. (2017). Alien citizens: Why the
church is political. Plough Quarterly, 11,
17-21.
Wright, A. (2000). The spiritual education
project: Cultivating spiritual and
religious literacy through a critical
pedagogy of religious education. In M.
Grimmitt (Ed.), Pedagogies of religious
education: Case studies in the research
and development of good pedagogic
practice in RE (pp. 53-69). Great
Wakering, Essex: McCrimmons.
Wright, A. (2013). Christianity and critical
realism: Ambiguity, truth and theological
literacy. Routledge: Abingdon, Oxon.